FEDERAL COMMUN ICATIONS COMMISSION
WASHINGTON
OFFICE OF
THE CHAIRMAN
June 24, 2015
The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings
Ranking Member
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Cummings:
On April 23, 2015, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report entitled
Telecommunications: FCC Should Evaluate the Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Lifeline Program (GAO-
15-335) ("Report" or "GAO Report"). The GAO Report examined: 1) the extent to which the Commission
evaluated Lifeline program effectiveness; 2) reforms the Commission adopted in its 2012 Lifeline Reform
Order, including the status of these reforms; 3) implementation ofthe Low-Income Broadband Pilot Program
(Pilot Program); and 4) challenges faced by participants in the Lifeline program. This Report provided
important feedback on the Lifeline program, and we have incorporated many ofthe questions raised in the
Report in the Lifeline item that we adopted last week.
We agree with GAO on the importance of evaluating whether the Lifeline program is achieving its
goals.' In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order adopted by the Commission last week, we took steps that will
help us evaluate the effectiveness ofthe Lifeline program. The Commission sought comment, for example,
on ways the program could improve the affordability of voice and broadband as well as increase adoption of
those services.' The Commission also sought comment on whether it should consider other measurements
that will assist in an ongoing evaluation of the program in addition to the measurements established by the
Commission in 2012 in the Lifeline Reform Order.' To more specifically address GAO's recommendation,
the Commission sought comment on how it can best evaluate the Lifeline program and the extent to which the
program has achieved the program goals."
The 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order also addressed the reforms highlighted by GAO which had not
yet been fully realized and the challenges faced by subscribers and providers participating in the Lifeline
program. We are pleased that the Commission's previous reforms have taken hold and resulted in a
1 See Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization et al., we Docket No. 11-42 et al., Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 27 FCC Red 6656, 6670-77, paras. 24-43 (2012) (Lifeline Reform Order).
(adopting as the goals of the program ensuring availability of voice, ensuring availability of broadband, and minimizing
the contribution burden on consumers and businesses).
2 See Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization et al., we Docket No. 11-42 et aI., Second FurtherNotice of
Proposed Rulemaking, Order on Reconsideration, Second Report and Order, and Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC
15-71,paras. 37-51 (2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order).
3 Jd. at para. 157.
41d.
Page 2-The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings
sustained, accountable program, but agree with GAO that the Commission's work is not complete. As a
result, the Commission took further steps to continue implementation of the four reforms highlighted by the
GAO. For example, the Commission has proposed to establish a permanent support amount of $9.25 for the
program.' Likewise, to streamline the Lifeline eligibility process and properly align incentives with the goals
of the program, the Commission sought comment on a variety of options to remove the responsibility of
conducting the eligibility determination from the providers."
Last month, the Wireline Competition Bureau ("Bureau") released the Low Income Broadband Pilot
Program Staff Report, which serves as a reference document to complement the full release of subscriber data
collected by providers during the Pilot Program.' The GAO report states that the Commission did not
conduct a needs assessment or develop implementation and evaluation plans prior to establishing the Pilot
Program. The Bureau did issue a Public Notice setting forth application criteria and procedures for pilot
program applications and explained how it would favor pilot projects designed as field experiments, and
included detailed surveys that would be completed during the course ofthe pilot." In selecting the pilot
projects, Commission staff struck a balance between allowing providers enough flexibility in the design of the
pilots and ensuring the structure of each project would result in data that would be statistically and
economically relevant. In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order, we sought comment on the data and how the
data should inform Commission policy-making as we move forward with modernizing the Lifeline program.
Finally, the GAO report notes challenges faced by subscribers enrolling in the program and retaining
benefits over time, as well as challenges faced by providers participating in the Lifeline program. For
example, many providers were prohibited from retaining copies ofthe documentation that applicants provide
to verify eligibility. The Commission's recent action both permits and requires eligible telecommunications
carriers to retain documentation demonstrating subscriber eligibility." Moreover, the Commission proposed a
number of additional ways to increase the efficient administration ofthe Lifeline program and measures to
enhance consumer protections and ease of participation in the program for both consumers and providers.'?
We recognize that the Lifeline program must continue to evolve to reflect the realities of the 21 st Century
communications marketplace in a way that ensures both the beneficiaries of the program, as well as those who
pay into the universal service fund.
SId at paras. 52-3.1
6Id at paras. 64-91.
7 See Low-Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff Report, WC Docket No. 11-42, DA 15-624 at para. 23 (Wireline
Compo Bur. 2015)
8 See generally Wireline Competition Bureau Announces Application Procedures and Deadline/or Applications to
Participate in the Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, WC Docket No. 11-42, Public Notice, 27 FCC Red 4840
(Wireline Compo Bur. April 30, 2012).
9 See 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order at paras. 224-237.
10 See id. at paras. 63-223 (seeking comment on various proposals such as third-party eligibility determination,
streamlining ETC designation process, and ways to increase transparency in the program).
2
Page 3-The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings
The Commission and its staff appreciate the GAO's analysis and its recommendation. We look
forward to continuing to work with the GAO and Congress in our efforts to reform and modernize the Lifeline
program. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely
~Tom Wheeler
cc: The Honorable John Thune, Chairman
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
3
FEDERAL COMMUN ICATIONS COMM ISSION
WASHINGTON
OFFICE OF
THE CHAIRMAN
June 24, 2015
The Honorable Jason Chaffetz
Chairman
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Chairman Chaffetz:
On April 23, 2015, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report entitled
Telecommunications: FCC Should Evaluate the Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Lifeline Program (GAO-
15-335) ("Report" or "GAO Report"). The GAO Report examined: 1) the extent to which the Commission
evaluated Lifeline program effectiveness; 2) reforms the Commission adopted in its 2012 Lifeline Reform
Order, including the status of these reforms; 3) implementation of the Low-Income Broadband Pilot Program
(Pilot Program); and 4) challenges faced by participants in the Lifeline program. This Report provided
important feedback on the Lifeline program, and we have incorporated many ofthe questions raised in the
Report in the Lifeline item that we adopted last week.
We agree with GAO on the importance of evaluating whether the Lifeline program is achieving its
goals.' In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order adopted by the Commission last week, we took steps that will
help us evaluate the effectiveness of the Lifeline program. The Commission sought comment, for example,
on ways the program could improve the affordability of voice and broadband as well as increase adoption of
those services.' The Commission also sought comment on whether it should consider other measurements
that will assist in an ongoing evaluation ofthe program in addition to the measurements established by the
Commission in 2012 in the Lifeline Reform Order.' To more specifically address GAO's recommendation,
the Commission sought comment on how it can best evaluate the Lifeline program and the extent to which the
program has achieved the program goals."
The 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order also addressed the reforms highlighted by GAO which had not
yet been fully realized and the challenges faced by subscribers and providers participating in the Lifeline
program. We are pleased that the Commission's previous reforms have taken hold and resulted in a
I See Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization et al., WC Docket No. 11-42 et al., Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 27 FCC Red 6656, 6670-77, paras. 24-43 (2012) (Lifeline Reform Order).
(adopting as the goals of the program ensuring availability of voice, ensuring availability of broadband, and minimizing
the contribution burden on consumers and businesses).
2 See Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization et al., WC Docket No. 11-42 et aI., Second Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, Order on Reconsideration, Second Report and Order, and Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC
15-71, paras. 37-51 (2015 Lifeline FNPRA1 & Order).
3 [do at para. 157.
4 Jd.
Page 2-The Honorable Jason Chaffetz
sustained, accountable program, but agree with GAO that the Commission's work is not complete. As a
result, the Commission took further steps to continue implementation of the four reforms highlighted by the
GAO. For example, the Commission has proposed to establish a permanent support amount of $9.25 for the
program.' Likewise, to streamline the Lifeline eligibility process and properly align incentives with the goals
ofthe program, the Commission sought comment on a variety of options to remove the responsibility of
conducting the eligibility determination from the providers."
Last month, the Wireline Competition Bureau ("Bureau") released the Low Income Broadband Pilot
Program Staff Report, which serves as a reference document to complement the full release of subscriber data
collected by providers during the Pilot Program.' The GAO report states that the Commission did not
conduct a needs assessment or develop implementation and evaluation plans prior to establishing the Pilot
Program. The Bureau did issue a Public Notice setting forth application criteria and procedures for pilot
program applications and explained how it would favor pilot projects designed as field experiments, and
included detailed surveys that would be completed during the course ofthe pilot." In selecting the pilot
projects, Commission staff struck a balance between allowing providers enough flexibility in the design ofthe
pilots and ensuring the structure of each project would result in data that would be statistically and
economically relevant. In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order, we sought comment on the data and how the
data should inform Commission policy-making as we move forward with modernizing the Lifeline program.
Finally, the GAO report notes challenges faced by subscribers enrolling in the program and retaining
benefits over time, as well as challenges faced by providers participating in the Lifeline program. For
example, many providers were prohibited from retaining copies of the documentation that applicants provide
to verify eligibility. The Commission's recent action both permits and requires eligible telecommunications
carriers to retain documentation demonstrating subscriber eligibility." Moreover, the Commission proposed a
number of additional ways to increase the efficient administration of the Lifeline program and measures to
enhance consumer protections and ease of participation in the program for both consumers and providers."
We recognize that the Lifeline program must continue to evolve to reflect the realities of the 21 sr Century
communications marketplace in a way that ensures both the beneficiaries ofthe program, as well as those who
pay into the universal service fund.
SId. at paras. 52-3.
6 ld. at paras. 64-91.
7 See Low-Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff Report, WC DocketNo. 11-42, DA 15-624 at para. 23 (Wireline
CompoBur. 20 IS)
8 See generally Wireline Competition Bureau Announces Application Procedures and Deadlinefor Applications to
Participate in the Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, WC DocketNo. 11-42, Public Notice, 27 FCC Red 4840
(Wireline CompoBur. April 30, 2012).
9 See 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order at paras. 224-237.
!O See id. at paras. 63-223 (seeking comment on various proposals such as third-party eligibility determination,
streamliningETC designation process, and ways to increase transparency in the program).
2
Page 3-The Honorable Jason Chaffetz
The Commission and its staff appreciate the GAO's analysis and its recommendation. We look
forward to continuing to work with the GAO and Congress in our efforts to reform and modernize the Lifeline
program. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely~4:L
~~ler
cc: The Honorable John Thune, Chairman
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
3
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMM ISSION
WASHINGTON
OFFICE OF
THE CHAIRMAN
June 24,2015
The Honorable Thomas R. Carper
Ranking Member
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
United States Senate
340 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Carper:
On April 23, 2015, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report entitled
Telecommunications: FCC Should Evaluate the Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Lifeline Program (GAO-
15-335) ("Report" or "GAO Report"). The GAO Report examined: 1) the extent to which the Commission
evaluated Lifeline program effectiveness; 2) reforms the Commission adopted in its 2012 Lifeline Reform
Order, including the status of these reforms; 3) implementation ofthe Low-Income Broadband Pilot Program
(Pilot Program); and 4) challenges faced by participants in the Lifeline program. This Report provided
important feedback on the Lifeline program, and we have incorporated many ofthe questions raised in the
Report in the Lifeline item that we adopted last week.
We agree with GAO on the importance of evaluating whether the Lifeline program is achieving its
goals.' In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order adopted by the Commission last week, we took steps that will
help us evaluate the effectiveness of the Lifeline program. The Commission sought comment, for example,
on ways the program could improve the affordability of voice and broadband as well as increase adoption of
those services.' The Commission also sought comment on whether it should consider other measurements
that will assist in an ongoing evaluation of the program in addition to the measurements established by the
Commission in 2012 in the Lifeline Reform Order/ To more specifically address GAO's recommendation,
the Commission sought comment on how it can best evaluate the Lifeline program and the extent to which the
program has achieved the program goals."
The 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order also addressed the reforms highlighted by GAO which had not
yet been fully realized and the challenges faced by subscribers and providers participating in the Lifeline
program. We are pleased that the Commission's previous reforms have taken hold and resulted in a
I See Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization et al., WC Docket No. 11-42 et al., Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 27 FCC Red 6656,6670-77, paras. 24-43 (2012) (Lifeline Reform Order).
(adopting as the goals ofthe program ensuring availability of voice, ensuring availability of broadband, and minimizing
the contribution burden on consumers and businesses).
2 See Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization et al., WC Docket No. 11-42 et al., Second Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, Order on Reconsideration, Second Report and Order, and Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC
15-71, paras. 37-51 (2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order).
3 Id. at para. 157.
41d.
Page 2-The Honorable Thomas R. Carper
sustained, accountable program, but agree with GAO that the Commission's work is not complete. As a
result, the Commission took further steps to continue implementation of the four reforms highlighted by the
GAO. For example, the Commission has proposed to establish a permanent support amount of $9.25 for the
program' Likewise, to streamline the Lifeline eligibility process and properly align incentives with the goals
of the program, the Commission sought comment on a variety of options to remove the responsibility of
conducting the eligibility determination from the providers."
Last month, the Wireline Competition Bureau ("Bureau") released the Low Income Broadband Pilot
Program Staff Report, which serves as a reference document to complement the full release of subscriber data
collected by providers during the Pilot Program.' The GAO report states that the Commission did not
conduct a needs assessment or develop implementation and evaluation plans prior to establishing the Pilot
Program. The Bureau did issue a Public Notice setting forth application criteria and procedures for pilot
program applications and explained how it would favor pilot projects designed as field experiments, and
included detailed surveys that would be completed during the course of the pilot." In selecting the pilot
projects, Commission staff struck a balance between allowing providers enough flexibility in the design of the
pilots and ensuring the structure of each project would result in data that would be statistically and
economically relevant. In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order, we sought comment on the data and how the
data should inform Commission policy-making as we move forward with modernizing the Lifeline program.
Finally, the GAO report notes challenges faced by subscribers enrolling in the program and retaining
benefits over time, as well as challenges faced by providers participating in the Lifeline program. For
example, many providers were prohibited from retaining copies of the documentation that applicants provide
to verify eligibility. The Commission's recent action both permits and requires eligible telecommunications
carriers to retain documentation demonstrating subscriber eligibility." Moreover, the Commission proposed a
number of additional ways to increase the efficient administration of the Lifeline program and measures to
enhance consumer protections and ease of participation in the program for both consumers and providers.'?
We recognize that the Lifeline program must continue to evolve to reflect the realities of the 21 sf Century
communications marketplace in a way that ensures both the beneficiaries of the program, as well as those who
pay into the universal service fund.
51d. at paras. 52-3.
6Id. at paras. 64-9l.
7 See Low-Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff Report, WC Docket No. 11-42, DA 15-624 at para. 23 (Wireline
CompoBur. 2015)
8 See generally Wireline Competition Bureau Announces Application Procedures and Deadline for Applications to
Participate in the Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, WC DocketNo. 11-42, Public Notice, 27 FCC Rcd 4840
(Wireline CompoBur. April 30, 2012).
9 See 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order at paras. 224-237.
10 See id. at paras. 63-223 (seeking comment on various proposals such as third-party eligibility determination,
streamliningETC designation process, and ways to increase transparency in the program).
2
Page 3-The Honorable Thomas R. Carper
The Commission and its staff appreciate the GAO's analysis and its recommendation. We look
forward to continuing to work with the GAO and Congress in our efforts to reform and modernize the Lifeline
program. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.
AVt4i--
Tom Wheeler
cc: The Honorable John Thune, Chairman
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
3
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
WASHINGTON
OFFICE OF
THE CHAIRMAN
June 24, 2015
The Honorable Ron Johnson
Chairman
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
United States Senate
340 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Chairman Johnson:
On April 23, 2015, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report entitled
Telecommunications: FCC Should Evaluate the Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Lifeline Program (GAO-
15-335) ("Report" or "GAO Report"). The GAO Report examined: 1) the extent to which the Commission
evaluated Lifeline program effectiveness; 2) reforms the Commission adopted in its 2012 Lifeline Reform
Order, including the status of these reforms; 3) implementation ofthe Low-Income Broadband Pilot Program
(Pilot Program); and 4) challenges faced by participants in the Lifeline program. This Report provided
important feedback on the Lifeline program, and we have incorporated many ofthe questions raised in the
Report in the Lifeline item that we adopted last week.
We agree with GAO on the importance of evaluating whether the Lifeline program is achieving its
goals.' In the 2015 Lifeline FNP RM & Order adopted by the Commission last week, we took steps that will
help us evaluate the effectiveness ofthe Lifeline program. The Commission sought comment, for example,
on ways the program could improve the affordability of voice and broadband as well as increase adoption of
those services? The Commission also sought comment on whether it should consider other measurements
that will assist in an ongoing evaluation of the program in addition to the measurements established by the
Commission in 2012 in the Lifeline Reform Order.' To more specifically address GAO's recommendation,
the Commission sought comment on how it can best evaluate the Lifeline program and the extent to which the
program has achieved the program goals."
The 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order also addressed the reforms highlighted by GAO which had not
yet been fully realized and the challenges faced by subscribers and providers participating in the Lifeline
program. We are pleased that the Commission's previous reforms have taken hold and resulted in a
, See Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization et al., WC Docket No. 11-42 et al., Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 27 FCC Red 6656, 6670-77, paras. 24-43 (2012) (Lifeline Reform Order).
(adopting as the goals of the program ensuring availability ofvoice, ensuring availability of broadband, and minimizing
the contribution burden on consumers and businesses).
2 See Lifeline and Link LIp Reform and Modernization et al., WC Docket No. I 1-42 et al., Second FurtherNotice of
Proposed Rulemaking, Order on Reconsideration, Second Report and Order, and Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC
15-71, paras. 37-51 (2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order).
31d. at para. 157.
4Id.
Page 2-The Honorable Ron Johnson
sustained, accountable program, but agree with GAO that the Commission's work is not complete. As a
result, the Commission took further steps to continue implementation ofthe four reforms highlighted by the
GAO. For example, the Commission has proposed to establish a permanent support amount of $9.25 for the
program.' Likewise, to streamline the Lifeline eligibility process and properly align incentives with the goals
of the program, the Commission sought comment on a variety of options to remove the responsibility of
conducting the eligibility determination from the providers."
Last month, the Wireline Competition Bureau ("Bureau") released the Low Income Broadband Pilot
Program Staff Report, which serves as a reference document to complement the full release of subscriber data
collected by providers during the Pilot Program.' The GAO report states that the Commission did not
conduct a needs assessment or develop implementation and evaluation plans prior to establishing the Pilot
Program. The Bureau did issue a Public Notice setting forth application criteria and procedures for pilot
program applications and explained how it would favor pilot projects designed as field experiments, and
included detailed surveys that would be completed during the course of the pilot." In selecting the pilot
projects, Commission staff struck a balance between allowing providers enough flexibility in the design ofthe
pilots and ensuring the structure of each project would result in data that would be statistically and
economically relevant. In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order, we sought comment on the data and how the
data should inform Commission policy-making as we move forward with modernizing the Lifeline program.
Finally, the GAO report notes challenges faced by subscribers enrolling in the program and retaining
benefits over time, as well as challenges faced by providers participating in the Lifeline program. For
example, many providers were prohibited from retaining copies ofthe documentation that applicants provide
to verify eligibility. The Commission's recent action both permits and requires eligible telecommunications
carriers to retain documentation demonstrating subscriber eligibility." Moreover, the Commission proposed a
number of additional ways to increase the efficient administration of the Lifeline program and measures to
enhance consumer protections and ease of participation in the program for both consumers and providers.'?
We recognize that the Lifeline program must continue to evolve to reflect the realities of the 2151 Century
communications marketplace in a way that ensures both the beneficiaries of the program, as well as those who
pay into the universal service fund.
51d. at paras. 52-3.
6 1 d. at paras. 64-91.
7 See Low-Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff Report, WC DocketNo. 11-42, DA 15-624 at para. 23 (Wireline
CompoBur. 2015)
8 See generally Wireline Competition Bureau Announces Application Procedures and Deadline/or Applications to
Participate in the Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, WC Docket No. 11-42,Public Notice, 27 FCC Red 4840
(Wireline CompoBur. April30, 2012).
9 See 2015 Lifeline FNPRM & Order at paras. 224-237.
10 See id. at paras. 63-223 (seeking comment on various proposals such as third-party eligibility determination,
streamliningETC designation process, and ways to increase transparency in the program).
2
Page 3-The Honorable Ron Johnson
The Commission and its staff appreciate the GAO's analysis and its recommendation. We look
forward to continuing to work with the GAO and Congress in our efforts to reform and modernize the Lifeline
program. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely/t'f-
b:eeler
cc: The Honorable John Thune, Chairman
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
3